5 of the old girls already on the market for sale, free and clear of the bankruptcy: Robert J., Ralph E., Buster, Marion C and J George Betz. All have been laid up for quite a while so will need some serious work/repairs, i would think, to pass USCG/ABS.
Was offered a job on the Robert when new, many,many moons ago.
The B220 and Denise are loading at Buckeye Perth Amboy today. So stuff is starting to move.
220 and Morton Jr
Just not for Bouchard
Nope working for Unicorn shipping
Unico
On their way to Savannah with that first load.
No matter where they end up, glad to see them (The crews) working again. Mildly surprised that rig was ready to go so soon after the auction. Perhaps a bit of credit is due to the skeleton crew maintaining it during this chaos.
I believe the only units working are the ones that were bareboat chartered.
Mean While Morty continues to be Morty (from court filings yesterday):
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
-
Just two days after Morton S. Bouchard III (âMr. Bouchardâ) submitted a
âheartfeltâ letter to the Court over his concerns as to how the Debtorsâ sale process âwill not result
in any meaningful recoveries to general creditors,â Docket No. 1120, Ex. 2, Mr. Bouchard filed
the Amended BTC Claims and the Late Filed Debtor Subsidiaries Claims seeking to leapfrog all
unsecured creditors and place unsecured creditors in an even worse position than they already
find themselves. As detailed in the Committeeâs original objection, see Docket No. 1024 (the
âCommitteeâs Original Claims Objectionâ), Mr. Bouchard (personally, and through the other
Bouchard Note Parties) transferred approximately $40 million to BTC and the Debtorsâ vendors
or other creditors from February 2019 to September 2020 to fund shortfalls in the Debtorsâ
operations. Mr. Bouchard represented to his personal lawyer and the companyâs outside auditors
that such amounts were not loans, but instead equity contributions. Indeed, Mr. Bouchard was
prohibited from lending any amounts to BTC under BTCâs loan agreement with Wells Fargo. The Original Proofs of Claim (as defined below) were only asserted against debtor BTC. The Amended BTC Claims now state that the claims are âasserted jointly and/or severally against the Debtors in these jointly administered cases and is secured by the Claimantâs maritime liens on the Debtorsâ vessels as described in the annexed addendum.â As set forth below, this assertion of claims against the debtor subsidiaries is not only untimely, but also improperly filed because such claims were not separately filed against each Debtor Subsidiaries. The Committee refers to the purported claims against the debtor subsidiaries as the âLate Filed Debtor Subsidiaries Claimsâ for convenience and without waiving its objections to the improper filing in violation of the requirements of the Bar Date Order. Only when the Debtorsâ bankruptcy appeared imminent did Mr. Bouchard reverse his position
and instruct his personal lawyer to prepare promissory notes that were then backdated to reflect
the $40 million of purported âadvancesâ that he had previously made for BTCâs benefit. -
Now, when any recovery, much less a meaningful one, for unsecured creditors is
in significant doubt, Mr. Bouchard has filed the Amended BTC Claims and Late Filed Debtor
Subsidiaries Claims. Mr. Bouchard now asserts that his equity contributions are not only debt
claims against BTC, but also are somehow liabilities of the debtor subsidiariesâwho were not
obligors or guarantors of the backdated notesâand that these purported liabilities of the debtor
subsidiaries are secured by maritime liens. This belated assertion of secured claims is baseless. -
First, the Original Proofs of Claim (as defined herein) were only filed against
debtor BTC, the parent company that does not own any of the vessels on which Mr. Bouchard
now claims maritime liens. Instead, BTCâs subsidiaries own the vessels. As a result, the
Amended BTC Claims cannot support secured claims against BTC because none of the purported
collateralâthe vesselsâare owned by BTC. Thus, the only way to assert secured status is by
filing new (not amended) proofs of claim against the debtor subsidiaries. The Late Filed Debtor
Subsidiaries Claims, however, were filed more than three months after the applicable bar date
and are therefore untimely. Additionally, âamendingâ the claims originally asserted only against
debtor BTC to add claims against the debtor subsidiaries violates the Bar Date Order (as defined
below), which requires that proofs of claim be separately filed against each Debtor, and that listing
more than one Debtor in a proof of claim âmay be treated as if filed only against Bouchard
Transportation Co., Inc.â Bar Date Order ¶ 9(e). Asserting new claims against the debtor
subsidiaries through âamendmentsâ to claims against BTC is a transparentâand impermissibleâ
attempt to evade the bar date. The Late Filed Debtor Subsidiaries Claims must be disallowed as
untimely and improperly filed. -
Second, even if the Bouchard Note Parties were permitted to file late claims against
the debtor subsidiariesâfor which they have not even sought the required relief and have no
grounds to do soâthe Late Filed Debtor Subsidiaries Claims fail to meet the basic requirements
for proofs of claim, as they do not even identify how the debtor subsidiaries have any liability for
purported notes they are not obligated on nor provided guaranties for. Lastly, there is no basis
under applicable law for the Debtorsâ equity owner to assert maritime liens for ânecessariesâ
provided by third-party vendors and suppliers who have been paid.
Itâs like Morty is scraping his fingernails on a classroom chalkboard. Running out of paychecks for his attorneys it would seem.
Looks like Foss is taking over the show for Ride Cay
Now they are saying Bouchard employees files and records wonât rollover as originally told but will have to reapply with Foss to keep their jobs or be considered for a position.
FOSS is hiring. Virtually everyone is hiring.
Foss is union for at the very least engineers and deckhands too. That could be an attractive perk for some to deal with the hassle of reapplying.
Any word on what theyâre paying?
We were told pay stays the same with increased benefits, Thereâs a few of us who donât want to work for Foss
Iâm not up to date on Foss pay. Or union status. Itâs probably different in different ports.
Some time ago in Alaska, the wheelhouse was non-union at much better than Union wages, but the engineers and deck crew were IBU. At that point MMP Inland was out.
I donât know about now, MMP might, or might not, be back in for all I know.
Foss doesnât have much of presence in Alaska anymore. Four boats at the Red Dog Mine is about it.
I suspect that in some ports Foss might be all IBU, and in others all MMP, and in others a mix. But I really donât know.
Foss is a good company. A world better than Bouchard. Working for Foss should be similar to working for other big companies.
Most foss capts and mates are management (some capts/mates in la/lb are ibu) and the saltchuk companies have a great benefits package w/options for non union employeesâŠfrom what i have been told.
Most deckhands and engineers are IBU, i know in sf bay some are sup and in LA/ LB engineers are meba.
Generally speaking by all accounts, foss is a top tier tug company and one of the highest payingâŠgenerally speaking.
These jobs will all be East Coast and Gulf boats managed out of Jacksonville all non union, Bouchard pay was great, Morty not so much
But Foss and Crowley are very much alike it depends on your taste
We were hoping for a smaller management style since Rose Cay only got 10 boats and barges